Agenda item

1.       The Committee considered a report (Agenda Item 4(3)) concerning Planning Application 24/01602/REG4 in respect of proposed new single storey entrance, lobby and canopy. New entrance façade cladding, new door/window openings and new roof top plant.

2.       Ms Debra Inston introduced the report to Members, which took account of all the relevant policy considerations and other material planning considerations. In conclusion the report detailed that the proposal was acceptable in planning terms and officers recommended that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission, subject to the conditions outlined in the main and update reports.

3.       The Chairman asked Mr Paul Goddard if he had any observations relating to the application and it was noted that Highways Officers had no objections to the proposals.

4.       In accordance with the Council’s Constitution, David Harmon, Town Council representative, and Mr Nick Steele and Mr Tom Westerman, objectors, addressed the Committee on this application.

Parish/Town Council Representation

5.       Mr Harmon addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here: Western Area Planning Committee - 18th September 2024

Member Questions to the Parish/Town Council

6.       Members did not have any questions of clarification.

Objector Representation

7.       Mr Steele addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here: Western Area Planning Committee - 18th September 2024

8. Due to Mr Westerman’s request to speak being received after the deadline, the Committee voted to suspend standing orders to allow Mr Westerman to speak.
9.  Mr Westerman addressed the Committee. The full representation can be viewed here: Western Area Planning Committee - 18th September 2024

Member Questions to the Objector

10.   Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       There were approximately a dozen participants in the squash league, which was without any investment from the franchise holder to sustain those numbers.

·       The Local Authority should provide affordable access to squash courts, and Newbury Town Council also raised strong objections to the removal of the courts.

Planning Officer statement

11. Ms Debra Inston addressed the Committee and objectors regarding planning policy and of the limitations of the Committee regarding these policies. Debra Inston referred to section 55 of the Planning Act, which stated what development was and what the considerations were for determination in a planning application. The development of land could be change of use however, this did not include the operation of the interior of a building unless it was listed. Replacing the internal squash courts with sports studios would be classed as an internal operation, which would not require planning permission. The application for consideration was purely for external works to the building.
12. Standing orders were resumed.

Member Questions to Officers

13.   Members asked questions of clarification and were given the following responses:

·       Ms Inston stated that the planning application was not regarding internal changes, and the squash courts were only mentioned in the presentation in relation to the objections that had been raised. The objections raised by the objectors were not planning considerations.

Continuation of meeting

14.   In accordance with the Council’s Constitution point 7.13.5, the Committee supported the Chairman’s motion that the remaining business could be concluded by 10.30pm, and therefore continued with Agenda Item 4(3).

Debate

15.   Councillor Abbs opened the debate by stating that in his view squash courts were an amenity. He understood that this could not be considered as part of the application but wished to see the loss of the squash courts picked up by West Berkshire and sympathised with the points raised by the objectors.

16.   Councillor Hooker reiterated that it was not for the Committee to consider, as the squash courts were internal, and the application being considered by the Committee was regarding the foyer on the front of the building.

17.   Councillor Woollaston supported the points raised by Councillor Abbs regarding the squash courts and proposed for the issue to be raised at the next Executive or Council meeting.

18.   Councillor Foot noted that it had been made clear by Officers that the application did not pertain to the internal functions of the Leisure Centre, which were not a planning matter. He stated he had been in regular contact with the squash playing community and although he understood it was not the appropriate setting for him to make a statement, if Members wanted clarification on the matter, in light of his portfolio responsibilities, he would be happy to provide this. Councillor Woollaston noted the point and it was agreed that matter should be raised at a meeting of the Executive. 

19.   Councillor Gaines supported the application and felt the canopy would enhance the site. Councillor Gaines proposed the application be approved in line with the officer recommendation. Councillor Vickers seconded the proposal.

20.   Councillor Vickers noted the opportunity for a management plan as it was a live facility, in order to ensure that the developer took account of existing users of the facility, as it would not close during the works. Councillor Vickers questioned whether there was an appropriate planning condition for a working facility. Ms Inston advised Members that it would not be reasonable to put on such a condition because the application was for minor external changes and enhancement, and it was covered by other legislation.

21.   Councillor Hooker noted that on the site visit the possibility of permeable paving had been discussed but he believed officers had advised that there was no need for it to be permeable. Councillor Vickers suggested for transparency that this be noted in the minutes. Ms Inston stated that the SuDS Officer had raised no objections to the application, however the Committee could add a condition requiring details of the surfacing, as the application stated black and grey pavers, and further details could be ascertained by a hard surfacing condition. Members agreed that this should be included.

22.   The Chairman invited Members of the Committee to vote on the proposal by Councillor Gaines, seconded by Councillor Vickers, to grant planning permission subject to the conditions listed in the main report and an additional condition requiring details of surfacing. At the vote, the motion was carried.

RESOLVED that the Development Manager be authorised to grant planning permission subject to the conditions in the report and additional condition set out below regarding hard surface materials.